Third District Councilmember Bob Blumenfield is holding his rescheduled 5th Annual Blumenfield Bike Ride through Warner Center and Woodland Hills on April 21st; the original March date was postponed due to rain. This is your chance to meet the councilmember and discuss issues regarding bike safety and Vision Zero.

Former LA pro cyclist Phil Gaimon continues his Worst Retirement Ever series with the Taiwan KOM Challenge, Part 2: THE RACE.

………

Local

News of South LA’s two hit-and-runs, including the fatal crash that killed Frederick “Woon” Frazier, has gone international.

The NRDC has teamed with LADOT to issue a set of recommendations to flip the script on commuting, and “help L.A. use shared mobility as a tool to address climate change and make transportation more accessible for all.” Los Angeles has never had a problem setting goals; it’s in turning those goals into action where the city traditionally fails.

This is why people keep dying on our streets. A Wyoming man gets five years for his tenth DUI conviction after he was stopped leaving an Oregon strip club; his other nine convictions were in Wyoming. At least this time they managed to get him off the road before he killed someone, for a change.

No logical disconnect here. A Colorado TV station says bicyclists run stop signs all the time, but allowing them to treat stops as yields would result in a big increase in collisions. Uh, sure. Let’s go with that.

Kansas City residents have responded positively to road diets, as the city moves forward with plans for bikeways, including a 10-mile long bike lane. And without the near riots seen and threats to tar and feather elected officials like we’ve seen in the City of Angels.

In one of the most wrong-headed commentaries in recent memory, a Staten Island writer says they should declare themselves a traffic sanctuary, and refuse to obey any traffic laws that inconvenience them in the slightest, from the new 25 mph speed limit to speed and red light enforcement, and parking in bike lanes whenever they damn well feel like it.

We are currently drafting a Mobility Bill of Rights to identify core principles like reliability, safety, comfort, equity, transparency, and community that should be the foundation of services we provide or allow to serve Los Angeles. Each of these principles has a set of key performance indicators that we will baseline with Angelenos in order to guide improvements to existing service, like taxis and transit, and help us to regulate new services as they come into the city.

A new ranking of America’s best fondos rates Phil Gaimon’s Phil’s Cookie Fondo #8 in the US in just its 3rd year; last weekend’s Malibu GRANFONDO was ranked 13th, and the Campagnolo GranFondo San Diego was 3rd.

An Oakland letter writer says putting in a road diet is an “experiment by the traffic calming industry that is using social engineering and behavior modification” to force people onto bikeshare bikes. They’re onto us, comrades.

A road-raging Santa Fe NM driver admits to slamming on his brakes and backing into a senior citizens bike club, sending one rider to the hospital. Of course, in his telling, he’s the innocent victim of the rude and offensive riders who slammed into his car, then wanted to fight him; fortunately, he fled the scene before granny could kick his ass. And needless to say, he got off with a just a traffic ticket.

A North Carolina man gets 28 years behind bars for beating a bike rider to death after the victim complained about a too-close pass — and possibly used racial slurs. The driver’s son, who was 16-years old at the time of the attack, faces charges for joining in the road rage attack.

Britain’s Daily Mail says an “activist” cycling group in Melbourne, Australia, is fighting to remove fines for not wearing a bike helmet. Which seems like a perfectly reasonable thing for “activists” to advocate for.

We’ve talked a lot on here about North Figueroa. And how CD1 Councilmember Gil Cedillo singlehandedly blocked a shovel-ready complete streets project designed to tame the deadly street.

Less discussed is how committed Cedillo has been about blocking any similar projects in his district. Including a long-planned lane reduction on Temple Street that crosses council district boundaries.

Derrick Paul writes today to explain what’s going on with Temple.

Or not, in this case

………

I recently discovered a proposal to improve street safety near my neighborhood has been quietly canceled. LADOT proposed a group of projects around the middle of 2017 in support of the city’s Vision Zero initiative, which is a commitment to stop tolerating traffic-related injuries and fatalities on city streets.

One of the streets included — Temple Street — is directly adjacent to my neighborhood. The street carves through numerous street-facing residences and intersects several commercial corridors, connecting residents with businesses and public facilities (schools, parks, a library). However, like many streets in Los Angeles, this very localized thru-fare is also very large, and accommodates little else besides passing automobile traffic.

Crossing the street is a daring negotiation, and attempting to use a bicycle along it is hostile and outright dangerous, pushing any reasonable person to the sidewalk. The Vision Zero project called for numerous infrastructure changes to improve safety for all users of the street, but it’s implementation, set for completion last month, never materialized.

I learned that our district councilman stopped LADOT from moving forward. This is very surprising, as there had been no meetings with my neighborhood, no general outreach to constituents of the community. The project had been shelved with no public explanation.

Seeking further information from Council District 1, which is represented by Gil Cedillo, I reached out through one of his social media channels. I asked why his office doesn’t support mobility safety in our community. A response eventually came, but in the form of another question. “I support vehicle and pedestrian safety in our district. What makes you think otherwise?” he or someone associated claimed. After pointing to his contradicting decisions and pressing for further details, the chat went silent His form of outreach and accessibility turned out to be lip service, a façade of transparency. So I dug a little further and found this ground had been covered before.

In 2014, residents in Highland Park ran into a similar obstacle. After years of outreach and effort, advocates found their push for better street conditions unilaterally halted by Gil Cedillo. Initially promising constituents he would support their process, which had preceded him under councilmember Ed Reyes (who termed out in 2013), Gil Cedillo changed his mind once winning his election and denied LADOT the authority to implement the project.

Pushes to convince Cedillo to move forward with the project, as he promised, yielded divisive, charade meetings, little reasonable conversation or explanation, and little actual engagement. Pressure from advocates eventually ended with a letter from Cedillo, declaring his decision to indefinitely halt the project and expressing a list of alternatives, which strangely excluded the bicycle lane that formed the centerpiece of the project advocates long pushed for. Nearly four years later, most of Cedillo’s alternatives never materialized.

From 2013 to 2017, 23 people suffered severe injuries along the dangerous stretch of Temple Street near me, 5 of them fatal. Under a backdrop of this much carnage, our street has a lot of room for improvement, and our city’s department of transportation recognizes this and has done the hard work of designing, proposing, and funding a project to do so. Yet my city councilman mysteriously wants to keep it from moving forward. It’s really baffling. Is it out of spite? What stake does he have in keeping the street dangerous? None of this is clear. I could understand if Cedillo had made this decision out of a genuine concern of the community, but his decision is unilateral.

Our councilman should be supportive, not disconnecting from his constituents and making these very important decisions on his own. Is it not us who he is representing and responsive to?

The lack of engagement is reflected in our district webpage, where a photo of a smiling Gilbert Cedillo is surrounded by a ghostly shell of text, devoid of many community updates. Our councilmen and councilwomen practically have the power of kings in their jurisdiction, and unfortunately we have to pray they are virtuous enough to empower us. There are engaged constituents in District 1 interested in working to solve problems in our community. Momentum to reconfigure our most dangerous streets to a safer layout, as Vision Zero proposes, is an easy one, and Cedillo should support it. The alternative is dangerous streets that continue to fail us.

Fortunately all is not lost. Temple Street crosses through two districts — District 1 and 13. District 13, overseen by Councilmember Mitch O’Farrell, plans to support the project.

The bicycling portion of the plan calls for filling in gaps in the bicycle network and a focus on first and last mile connections to transit, as well as improving connections to the LA River bike path, after the city installed just 26 miles of bike infrastructure last year.

LADOT shifted their measurements to lane miles a few years back, so in actuality, they only installed bikeways on 13 miles of roadway — far from the 40 miles a year we were promised in the 2010 bike plan. Those could also include sharrows and bike routes, further reducing their value.

And there’s no word on whether that 26 miles includes the bike lanes in Playa del Rey, which were ripped out after angry drivers cowed city officials into backing down.

The city will continue to focus on Vision Zero and the High Injury Network, so we may see some additional improvements there.

But it looks like anyone hoping LADOT and the City of Los Angeles would actually move forward with the multiple bicycle networks we were promised in the hard-fought bike plan, now part of the city’s mobility plan, will be very disappointed.

Then again, most of us would be happy with a single bike network that actually went somewhere.

In other words, if a driver has to pass a bicycle with a three-foot passing distance, so would you. If a driver has to signal a lane change — not that many do — you would, too. And if you rode off after colliding with someone, you could be charged with hit-and-run.

Of course, you’d also have to turn on your lights and windshield wipers if it rained, have windshield and side mirrors, and only leave the door of your bicycle open long enough to get in and out.

In other words, it’s a stupid law that would have ridiculous and unpredictable consequences.

Masoner suggests it might merely be a placeholder to meet the legislature’s cutoff date for introducing new bills, with the intention that it would be gutted and replaced with something different at a later date.

Although he notes it also appears to be a response to this case from Sacramento, where a runner was seriously injured in a collision with a man on a bike, who just rode off afterwards. And the local DA couldn’t figure out if the hit-and-run statutes applied to a crash on a bike path.

However, if that’s the case, then the proper response would be to specify that hit-and-run is hit-and-run, no matter where or how it occurs.

A heavy handed, scattergun approach like this is the worst possible way to go about it.

On the other hand, the GOP’s minority status in the overwhelmingly Democratic legislature means there’s almost no chance this bill will actually go anywhere.

It takes a real jerk to steal an Aussie boy’s $2,000 mountain bike that he worked for two years to buy. On the other hand, his mom’s decision to leave it outside and unlocked while they went to diner wasn’t the brightest move, either.

Once again, bike riders are heroes. Participants in a frozen Chicago New Year’s Day ride saved the life of an elderly man who had apparently wandered off from a nursing home without a hat, coat or gloves in subfreezing temperatures. Thanks to J. Patrick Lynch for the heads-up.

A Florida DOT spokesman gets sharrows wrong, saying bike riders have the right to use the entire lane, but should ride to the right anyway. Sharrows actually indicate the proper lane positioning for people on bikes on lanes that are too narrow to safely share with a motor vehicle.

Just in time for the finale of the Tour de France, Santa Monica’s Caffe Luxxe is teaming with Helen’s Cycles to host an exhibition of rare vintage bikes starting today — July 20th, not January — through the end of September.

Michelle Sarfatti bases his refutation on Bartali’s famed reluctance to discuss his work during the war, and a problematic book written in the 1970s which was the first to claim Bartali had hidden forged identity papers in the frame of his bicycle to smuggle them past the Nazi’s.

Yet the Yad Vashem page cites Holocaust survivors whose identity papers were delivered by Bartali, and notes that he told his story to the daughter of the rabbi who founded the resistance network.

Local

Marketplacetalks with the founder of LA-based Thousand, asking if a better looking helmet will keep people safer on their bikes. Short answer, probably not. Longer answer, only if it gets people who wouldn’t otherwise wear one to strap it on.

Minneapolis police are looking for a bike rider who may have witnessed officers attempting to resuscitate the unarmed Australian woman the cops shot after she had called 911 to report a sexual assault.

Talk about going the wrong way. Atlanta is the latest city to rip out an apparently success bike lane — in this case one built with the support of REI and People For Bikes — and replaced it with parking.

Cyclists in Sydney, Australia are complaining about cars parked in a bike lane, putting children at risk from oncoming cars when they have to ride into traffic to get around them. Proving once again that the same problems exist everywhere.

Which as of early Thursday morning, had managed to collect a whopping 70 signatures — 44 of them anonymous.

Maybe someone should point out that an anonymous signature is the same as no signature at all. Which leaves just 26 people brave, and mistaken, enough to put their name where their mouth is.

Mistaken, because California law allows bicycles on any public roadway where motor vehicles are allowed, with the exception of some limited access highways.

Which means that the only ways to ban bicycles from those roads is to —

A) Change the state law;

B) Start a crowdsourcing campaign to raise the several million dollars it would take to buy the roadways from the city, and convert them into private streets; or

C) Ban all motor vehicles from the streets, requiring residents to walk up the steep hillsides to get to their homes.

Personally, I’m all in favor of the last option; if they want to get rid of bikes, they can give up their expensive cars and massive SUVs. At which point they’d complain about all the damn hikers clogging the streets.

Then again, there is one other option.

They could accept that the public roadways belong to the public, and that anyone who wants to use them is entitled to do so, for any reason, using any form of street legal conveyance. And then slow the hell down and learn to drive safely.

But that’s not likely to happen anytime soon.

Which is not to say the people on bikes aren’t part of the problem.

We can all make a point to be more courteous and ride safely, and make room for others on the road to get by when it’s safe to do so.

Even if we’re the only ones who do it.

………

Congratulations to Michelle Mowery on her new job with the City of Long Beach.

She spent years struggling with LADOT’s notoriously auto-centric senior engineers — and often, the city’s more vocal bike advocates. But showed what she could do when she finally got the chance under former Mayor Villaraigosa.

Too bad the progress they made has come to a screeching halt since then.

Writing for the International Journal of Transportation Innovation, the LACBC’s Tamika Butler asks uneasy questions about the role of Vision Zero in a racist society, and whether the engineers and policy makers responsible for implementing it have the skills to rectify inequity in city planning.

In yet another example of allowing dangerous drivers to remain on the road until they kill someone, an Oregon driver gets three and a half years for killing a bike rider, by driving with bald tires that caused his truck to fishtail in wet weather. He admitted to receiving somewhere between 30 to 40 tickets for driving with a suspended license, but would just buy another cheap used car when his got impounded.

Three whole blocks, that is. With no plans to extend them in any direction.

In other words, yet another in LA’s dystopian non-network of disconnected bike lanes that don’t go anywhere or connect to anything.

They just are. Which may be very Zen. But it’s also just this side of worthless.

More troubling is why.

Why not extend bike lanes further south on Glendale to Downtown and north to Silver Lake? Apparently that would involve far more than restriping the road.

“Extending bike lanes north would require Caltrans involvement as [Glendale Boulevard] becomes a State Highway (Route 2) north of Berkeley,” Fremaux explained. “On either end, the existing width would not allow for the extension without removing lanes and/or parking. Exploring such an effort is not in our near-term workplan.”

Let that sink in.

They’re more than happy to install a bike lane as part of a repaving project, but only as long as it doesn’t inconvenience anyone.

As far as the city is concerned, your life and safety are less important than a parking space. Let alone your comfort and convenience on the road.

Which is the exact opposite of Vision Zero.

And the opposite of what cities like New York, Portland and Vancouver are doing by narrowing roads and removing parking spaces to make room for bike lanes. And resulting in not just better safety, but improved traffic flow, increased livability and better sales figures for businesses along the routes.

We expected better from Mayor Eric Garcetti and LADOT General Manager Seleta Reynolds. But until they’re willing to make the hard choices and stand up to local opposition and sometimes recalcitrant councilmembers, we’re not going to get it.

So we’ll have to settle for a disconnected non-network of three-block long bike lanes that don’t go anywhere.

There’s an election in Pasadena next Tuesday for the last remaining seat on the city council between incumbent Andy Wilson, who supports the new Union Street cycle track and the coming bikeshare system, and challenger Phil Hosp, who complains about being stuck in traffic caused by the Gold Line.

It was a case of instant karma in Santa Rosa, when a driver who circled around to harass a bicyclist lost control of his car and crashed into a parked truck. Although someone should ask the Press Democrat what the hell difference it makes whether the bike rider was a transient.

But if you live in the LA area and want to attend, you’ll have to travel at least 120 miles, as they’re apparently avoiding Los Angeles like the plague. They’re making four California stops, with the closest one in San Diego on July 8th. Not to mention two in the Bay Area.

Seriously, was it something we said?

………

There will be a meeting in Huntington Park tomorrow to discuss plans for the awkwardly named Active Transportation Rail to River Corridor.

A 50-year old bike rider suffered unspecified injuries when he allegedly turned left into the path of a BMW in Glendale Friday afternoon; police concluded the victim was at fault. Let’s hope that’s based on something other than the statement of the driver involved.

Pasadena gets it. The Rose City has adopted a new Street Design Guide that focuses moving everyone, not just the people in cars, and “accommodate(s) all users such as pedestrians, bicyclists, public transit, skateboarders and scooters.”

Jason Roy Rocha was charged with gross vehicular manslaughter, evading police and hit and run with permanent injury after fleeing the Sunday morning crash that killed Encarnacion Salazar Munoz as he rode his bike home from work in Anaheim. The OC DA takes traffic crimes like this very seriously; with a little luck, Mr. Rocha can look forward to a long time behind bars.

More bad news from NorCal, where a man on a bike was killed in collision in West San Jose; no details are available. Al Williams fills in some of the details, reporting the crash occurred near his home on a four lane street with bike lanes and a 35 mph speed limit; he says there was a Porsche with a broken windshield stopped on the side of the road when he went by.

The Guardian’s Peter Walker dives head first into the great helmet debate, saying that while he wears one most of the time when he rides, “you don’t make cycling safe by obliging every rider to dress up as if for urban warfare.”

Richard Masoner of Cyclelicious offers a review of bike-related legislation in the state legislature, including the possible elimination of the ride-to-the-right law we discussed yesterday, and an actual bipartisan bill to legalize the Idaho Stop — a term Masoner helped popularize — in California. The only thing more shocking than the Idaho Stop actually being considered in California is the concept of Democrats and Republicans actually working together to pass it.

A bill in the Iowa legislature would force drivers to change lanes to pass bike riders, while requiring bicyclists to use front and rear lights at all times — even in broad daylight — while a competing bill would require riders to display a slow-moving vehicle flag.

The 22-year old driver who plowed into a group of Malaysian teenagers, killing eight and injured another eight, is reportedly traumatized by the experience. No matter how bad she feels, the victims’ families feel a hell of a lot worse.